ForumsWEPRThat (in my opinion) IDIOT burning the koran on 9/11

327 81599
wwiifan
offline
wwiifan
272 posts
Nomad

If you know what I'm talking about, I hope you agree with me that he is a complete moron. He is putting our troops over in Afghanistan at risk, by making 'moderate' muslims 'extreme' muslims. Post your ideas on this topic here:

  • 327 Replies
crazenird
offline
crazenird
329 posts
Nomad

Turns it white, a universal sign of surrender


oh ok, thank you
AnaLoGMunKy
offline
AnaLoGMunKy
1,573 posts
Blacksmith

Or a sign that you just stripped the flag of its colours and status imbued upon it by people who worship idols. Thats my take on it anyway.

NoNameC68
offline
NoNameC68
5,043 posts
Shepherd

Or a sign that you just stripped the flag of its colours and status imbued upon it by people who worship idols. Thats my take on it anyway.


Or you can burn away the colors.

Bleaching the flag and burning it are both offensive. If you intend to bleach a flag to send a message, then you're no better than burning the flag. The only difference is that burning the flag is more "angry looking". Again, I must remind you that the point of burning a flag is to send a message. You should respond to the message being sent rather than the means by which it was sent.

If someone bleaches the flag or throws it on the ground, you know that person is dissatisfied with America (or whoever's flag they used). If they burn it, then they are very unhappy with America. The message is the same, regardless of what is done.
AnaLoGMunKy
offline
AnaLoGMunKy
1,573 posts
Blacksmith

If someone bleaches the flag or throws it on the ground, you know that person is dissatisfied with America (or whoever's flag they used). If they burn it, then they are very unhappy with America. The message is the same, regardless of what is done.


True... but I bet ppl wouldn't get their pantys in quite so big a twist if some arab dude bleached the flag.

You should respond to the message being sent rather than the means by which it was sent.


Fully agreed, sadly too many people wont see past the burning flag.
5hadowles5
offline
5hadowles5
93 posts
Nomad

you know...i don't think you should burn and sacred book and Mrlets nuke a country there are innocent children there people who don't know the meaning of terrorism and more over believe me try nuking one out of 52 Islamic countries (or was it 42 doesn't matter) the others will try and get revenge (believe me) so lemme see 1 vs 51 um odds don't look good....

assassin89
offline
assassin89
1,303 posts
Nomad

I respect and admire Buddhists and Hindus for actually being peaceful compared to all the hypocrite Christens and Muslims.

Now thats a good point. Im not buddist but i respect and agree with many of their vailues and beliefs. Im against Christianity(I would explain why but you would be here a while) but i think even if it was the bible being burned i would still think he was stupid.
deathopper
offline
deathopper
1,564 posts
Nomad

I would think someone is stupid if he burns any book. It's like he's saying "I want to be stupid" because books symbolize knowledge and burning one would be like suppressing knowledge. I'm not a Buddhist either and when I wrote that I was ashamed of my fellow Muslim and I always like Buddhist philosophy.

NoNameC68
offline
NoNameC68
5,043 posts
Shepherd

I would think someone is stupid if he burns any book.


because books symbolize knowledge


You should never judge someone else with your own idea of what a symbol stands for. To you, book burnings are symbolic for suppressing knowledge, to another it is showing dissatisfaction towards the book.

and burning one would be like suppressing knowledge.


This would be true in a time when books were hand written. Today, they are mass produced. It's an unrealistic idea to suppress knowledge by burning books that are being mass produced today.

The pastor burning the Koran is not him trying to suppress knowledge, but rather show his dissatisfaction towards Muslims. He said all Muslims were violent, and when he threatened to burn the Koran, many Muslims started threatening the US. He was wrong to assume all Muslims are evil people, but he successfully riled up Muslims who should learn that their rules do not apply to the rest of the world. He threatened to burn the book because of the violent Muslims, and the violent Muslims reacted. Even though many Muslims are good people, I think he should have burned the Koran and gone through with his word just to show the radicals that their religious rules do not bind us, who live in a different nation, and who's majority are not Muslim.
Avorne
offline
Avorne
3,085 posts
Nomad

It can be spelt Quran or Koran. Also, part of the reason he was burning the Koran was to prove that Islam was violent, I expect he'd of been extremely happy to see rioting.

NoNameC68
offline
NoNameC68
5,043 posts
Shepherd

That's being stereotypical. When i burn a book, it means i want to keep a bonfire going. Burning something doesn't necessarily mean dissatisfaction or anger towards it.


That is true, that could be another reason to burn a book. I was not implying that burning a book had to be symbolic. However, we are talking about the pastor burning the Koran, who obviously wishes to prove a point by doing so.

Also, thinking that the man should've burned the Quran is outrageous. I am all for freedom of speech, but to an extent.


He's burning a book. That's it.

I would agree with you if he threatened to burn an original copy or handwritten version of the book from long ago.

but to an extent. Burning the Quran would have most likely started riots within and outside of the U.S.


I should not have to follow Muslim rules regarding their religion if I don't follow it myself. We can't limit our freedoms because they THREATEN US.

Burning the Quran would have most likely started riots within and outside of the U.S. With our government in the shape that it's in, i don't think that we need to have that to deal with also. Burning the Quran would just give other countries more reasons to bomb us.


If another country wants to bomb the US because one person wants to burn their holy book and the government doesn't stop them, then there's obviously a problem with those other countries, not the US. If you're willing to go to war with another country because they don't stop people from hating on your religion, then YOU'RE the one with the problems.

Let's say there are three people in a room. There's me, my friend, and a guy who LOVES The Beatles. I explain "I don't like The Beatles." The other guy in the room starts freaking out and tells me he will punch me if I say that again. My friend explains to the guy that I have every right to say it and I say it again. If the other guy punches my friend in the fact for what I said, or even attacks me for merely stating I dislike the Beatles, who has the problem?

Let's look at comedy central. They had to censor out Muhammad. I actually uploaded pictures of Muhammad to tinypic and posted them on here a few months ago and they were removed.

We should respect other religions, but more importantly is we should have our freedom of speech.

The pastor was a nutcase and I believe he honestly thinks all Muslims are bad, but the fact many radical Muslims have burned the American flag and chanted "Death to Americans" really forces me to defend the pastor by pointing out that he isn't completely wrong.

I don't think he should have threatened to burn the Koran. However, the reason he didn't burn the Koran wasn't because he had a change of heart or ideology, he changed his mind because people were rallying against him. The only reason I wish he had burned the Koran is to challenge not only how we perceive freedom of speech but to see how many people give into terrorist demands.

We should not be controlled by any religion, especially one the majority of Americans do not follow. We should not limit our freedom of speech just so we don't offend someone.
NoNameC68
offline
NoNameC68
5,043 posts
Shepherd

It's these kind of people who create wars in the world


Man 1: Don't say anything bad about my religion or I bomb your country.
Man 2: No, because your religion is BS.
Man 1: I'm bombing your country now.

Man 1 started the war, not man 2.
5hadowles5
offline
5hadowles5
93 posts
Nomad

THERE BOTH wrong a religion is a religion and it deserves respect i dont belive in hindduism i think it is wrong but i respect them as human biengs...same thing for other religions...(e.g christianity jews confouciense) (and the religion of those chinese monks what was it called..?)

AnaLoGMunKy
offline
AnaLoGMunKy
1,573 posts
Blacksmith

you know...i don't think you should burn and sacred book and Mrlets nuke a country there are innocent children there people who don't know the meaning of terrorism and more over believe me try nuking one out of 52 Islamic countries (or was it 42 doesn't matter) the others will try and get revenge (believe me) so lemme see 1 vs 51 um odds don't look good....


Just so you know... most of the worlds terrorists are likely not from the middle east. Perhaps they operate there but this in no way make the middle easy one big terrorist.

And its not 1 vs 51... did you see what America just did to Afghanistan?
CommanderDude7
offline
CommanderDude7
4,689 posts
Nomad

1 vs 51 um odds don't look good....

But if that one still has nukes....
AnaLoGMunKy
offline
AnaLoGMunKy
1,573 posts
Blacksmith

Not my fault they want to blow us up...


Who?

But if that one still has nukes....


Then all they will succeed in doing is killing millions of innocent people and create more martyrs.
Showing 211-225 of 327